I've seen 16" PC laptops with 1366x768 as their resolution. Por ejemplo. Compared to that, 15.4" @ 1680x1050 is pretty nice.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
15 inch macbook pro high res vs standard
- Thread starter tim100
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have the high-res and sometimes the text and icons are just a hair too small and I sorta regret not getting the standard res screen. I guess the ideal solution is a resolution independent OS.
Actually while the base price of a MBP is quite high, the price to upgrade to hi-res is quite reasonable. I agree that the MBP line is a high quality product, I've always enjoyed mine. It's a shame the prices are so high. However for Apple to remain the fat cash cow it is, they've got to raid the customers. Let's face it, Jobs and the shareholders love "Apple Tax"...
Assuming 1) you're ok with a refurbished mac
2) you can use the educational discount
3) you're looking at the 15" (I haven't looked into the 17")
the refurbished 15" Macbook pro base model has some pretty decent savings over both retail and the educational discount. However, if you want the Hi-Res screen like me, that means you have to get the (pretty much) fully loaded macbook pro which drives the price pretty high - especially if you don't care much for the other bumps (processor speed, hard drive space, graphics card). But putting the hi-res screen only on the base model that's at the educational discount base makes the final price only $100-something less than maxing out the refurb 15" Macbook pro. So you might as well go with that.
I have the standard res. 15". I'm 100% happy with it - personally, I thought the hi-res was a little too small for my tastes. Plus, I got a GREAT deal on my 15" i7, so I decided it was A-OK by me.
Oh, and as for glossy vs. anti-glare: I know I'll be hated on for this, but there is NO WAY I would ever buy the anti-glare. Maybe its just me, but after years of glossy screens (for better or for worse) I can't stand the look of matte - it just looks so dated. Sorry, but that's my opinion... and opinions are like a certain anatomical party that we all have.
Woo-hoo! I'm not alone... lol
Oh, and as for glossy vs. anti-glare: I know I'll be hated on for this, but there is NO WAY I would ever buy the anti-glare. Maybe its just me, but after years of glossy screens (for better or for worse) I can't stand the look of matte - it just looks so dated. Sorry, but that's my opinion... and opinions are like a certain anatomical party that we all have.
Woo-hoo! I'm not alone... lol
compare it with €2000,- + laptops !! I know any basic €500,- laptop has a crappy screen, but I was talking about high-end laptops. In that arena, the Macbook is behind the competition when it's about screen resolution.
Hard to find a PC laptop for more than $2000.
I did do a bit of searching and found $1,500+ laptops with 16" screens and 1366x768 or 1600x900, and even an 18" with 1680x945. Not that bad, huh? These are 'high-end' laptops according to you.Hard to find a PC laptop for more than $2000.
Nice find!! Still, I didn't say you couldn't find one (you did). Only thing I mean to say is [most] laptops in this high price range have 1680x1050 standard on a 15.4" screen in 2010. Selling the "option" as high-res is nonsense marketing to me. Not trying to be annoying, just saying that i believe Apple is cutting corners here, where the market standard for these screens seems to be 1680x1050. In my perspective, Apple would be in its right calling it "high-res" if they'd offer something that is better than market-standard, which they don't (just talking about screen resolution here).
If Apple truly believes this is high-res, they're either lagging begind (which they're not really) or are just upselling us to the screen that should be included in the first place.
Haha. Yeah... I would love for Apple to offer the 1680x1050 as standard, but who knows if they ever will. Going from 1280x800 on my MacBook to 1680x1050 on my desktop (and back again) is painful sometimes. When I replace the laptop I'll be going for the HR-AG model.
You'll love it, I'm sure
The "high-res" screens are stunning, and as mentioned by Jaro, it's a no-brainer (unless you're visually impaired)Wow its a no contest for the hi-res. I think the 1680 x 1050 resolution is going to be standard in the next revision so it would be best to pick up one of those now to future proof the machine a bit.
no brainer...
also if things sometimes do look too small(for example, watching nba highlight in espn.com) you can always magnify them(yes do lose little bit of clarity but those are far and few in between; I can live w/ it)..
I also code a lot so sometimes I need even more but at that point you lose the portability -- 15 inch is already pushing it as it is.
also if things sometimes do look too small(for example, watching nba highlight in espn.com) you can always magnify them(yes do lose little bit of clarity but those are far and few in between; I can live w/ it)..
I also code a lot so sometimes I need even more but at that point you lose the portability -- 15 inch is already pushing it as it is.
See the thing here is that many of these pages you have to zoom in in order to read any kind of article better. Back when I had the hi-res, I had to zoom into every page when I read whatever was on the page. And when you do that, much of the quality of the page is lost when it comes to the pictures and video, as you described. I swapped it for the standard res and I don't have to zoom in any page, and the entire web page is natural. I'm still on the fence because me personally I cannot stand the gloss of the standard res, and that's making want to go to back to the anti-glare.
I agree. I really don't have the "need" for the hi res, but it's the only way to get the anti-glare screen. If it were an option, I would choose the standard res with anti-glare.
Do most apple stores have a hi-res glossy and a hi-res anti glare 15 in. to compare right next to each other?
And 15" w/ 1280x800. Anyway, my strong preference is for the 17". One-handing, like people do with 13" all the time, is tricky on the 15" and is dangerous on the 17". But, I like screen real estate and pixels, and it isn't nearly as heavy or bulky as people think it is going to be. People should try out the 17" before deciding against it.
it hurts my heart that my uni didn't over the hires models or sad upgrades, not even 7,200rpm drives. it is a 5,400rpm model! hdd can upgrade, but not the screen . 
.